Proposal: change internal database naming scheme

[mlucy]

@Tryneus told me that if you have a project foo, we currently create two databases foo and foo_internal. This naming scheme is kind of bad, because if a user has two projects bar and bar_internal, the internal database for the first project and the non-internal database for the second project will conflict.

Another problem is that we aren't namespacing these databases, which makes it hard for them to coexist with other databases that might already be in people's RethinkDB cluster. (For example, if you have data in the test database, which is very common, then having a project named test will be in the same place.)

I'd like to propose that instead of foo and foo_internal, we have hz_foo and hzinternal_foo. That solves the first problem and also makes conflicts much much less likely (as well as allowing people to have projects named rethinkdb).

[deontologician]

This was resolved in 2.0.0, we now have hz_ prefixed secret tables in the app database.